DevTracker

[Ronyn]

Look, so far it's the best i can come up with. ....
It may be the dumbest idea ever but so far it's the best i can come up with. Criticize it all you want.

Snowflake, please hear me. I'm not criticizing your idea, I like your idea. I never said it was bad, I said it was good. I don't know what else I can say on that front.

My last several posts were not attempts to argue against your idea, in fact they weren't even discussing your idea at all. I'm only trying to clarify general terms, cause and effect. In response to this post. If we are going to talk about things like "power creep" and "good economies" It's best to know exactly what means what, and what does what. Knowing those things offers clarity and options. It's best to know what options are available to solve certain problems, regardless of which one you go with in the end.

To me it seems a lot of you support vertical progression. Good luck with that.

I was using the calling in of vehicles as an example of the various costs and consumables involved in a larger battlefield. I said it was similar to your idea, I did not suggest that was the whole system we intend to use.

I think snowflake meant as temporary buff, like those buff food in GW2. You can craft them, use em when ever you want (1 time usage) and enjoy the benefits.

Yes. As I have said many times, I like his temporary buff idea. I think it can come across well in many forms.
That said, there has been some confusion and misuse of certain terms, cause and effect that I was hoping to correct.

 

[Ronyn]

Yes there will Always be some type of powercreep. Agreed.

I pointed out that progression doesn't need to be infinite for there to be power creep. I didn't say there will always be some form of power creep.

Faster cooldowns, more speed, longer duration of defensive abilities is also a form of powercreep.

That's a form of vertical progression. Do you consider vertical progression and power creep the same thing?
The definition I use-

Vertical progression and Power creep are not synonyms, and the former doesn't inherently lead to the latter.
Power creep is when the player's new power makes earlier content irrelevant.

Than why level at all?

The "Why" is motivation: The player is motivated to level up so they can succeed in areas they currently cannot survive in as a lower level. The fact that scaling would mean going back to lower level's can still offer challenge and reward, does not necessarily change the feeling of accomplishment from that initial climb.

I said bad-ass, not god mode.

You said both. You said "people like to feel badass" and you said "feeling like a god tends to get boring really fast" as well as "I can always go back to lower areas and face stomp lower baddies but it's just god mode."
So then if a scaling system allowed the player to feel badass in lower levels, but never allowed them to get full god mode, isnt that achieving one of the goals you set?

Power comes in many forms, this is why i support diagonal progression.

Diagonal progression is a combination of both vertical and horizontal growth. I support that as well. Remember, I'm not championing some sort of infinite vertical growth. I'm only trying to clarify some terms, cause and effect.

 

[Ronyn]

Depending on the powercurve. It's fun to feel like a badass. Feeling like a god tends to get boring really fast. Ask the Olympians.

Ok. So you acknowledge that power creep can exist even if there is a limit on the vertical power increase.

Not much. But show me a way it can be done. It's easy to ask questions, provide a solution then.

There is a reason I'm asking questions instead of just providing answers.
For what it's worth, one solution is already part of the discussion. Scaling. Another solution would be dynamic encounters that match to your level, which could be defined as a different form of scaling.

It makes progression in a vertical progression system irrelevant.

If you start out at level 1, then have to earn the power of level 10 before you can face level 10 enemies, doesn't that alone make the vertical progression relevant?
Or does that become all for nothing simply because when you go back to level one, scaling kicks in and you don't get to have god mode? Which, I believe you said god mode gets boring really fast.

Again, what i'm suggestion is not decay, ...

I'm not debating your idea. Right now I'm just trying to get some clarity of terms.

 

[Ronyn]

This isn't supposed to be a game where you keep getting more and more powerful, especially not in the traditional sense. Otherwise you end up with "powercreep".

Even in games where you only get so much stronger than you started, early levels can still be made irrelevant. Is that not still power creep?

To me power creep is, always wanting to get more powerful in the traditional sense where numbers keep going up in pure DMG and HP. It's a never ending cycle. I get more HP and DMG, baddies get more HP and DMG. I can always go back to lower areas and face stomp lower baddies but it's just god mode.

What exactly would be wrong with getting stronger and stronger unless it makes old content useless and/or too easy?

One way of fixing this is scaling but imo, this is an insult to gamers.

Why is scaling an insult to gamers?

 

[Ronyn]

I still disagree on your point that no form of item degradation or consumables work as a damper on power creep.

That's not exactly what I said. It's more that item degradation does not inherently damper power creep, as it depends on how it is applied. It's also that power creep can be dampened other ways as well. Ultimately, the goal is to keep all areas of the game relevant to the player. If that is achieved, by whatever means, power creep is averted.

Hmm. Let me try this a different way. How do you define power creep?